Our View: Auditor's first steps are on the right track

When Suzanne M. Bump was sworn in as state auditor in January, she became the first new holder of the constitutional office in 24 years.

When Suzanne M. Bump was sworn in as state auditor in January, she became the first new holder of the constitutional office in 24 years.

Bump had campaigned on raising the standards of transparency, accountability and effectiveness in the office that makes sure tax dollars are spent according to the rules.

Her impact on the office was immediate, ordering a peer review of the office even before she was sworn in. She cut 10 percent of the jobs in the office of about 300. And early this month, as a result of the peer review, another 27 employees were let go and a dozen reassigned.

Just cutting jobs isn't enough to say that change has come, but the work being done by the office since her arrival is.

With a professional, systematic approach to identifying and correcting weak spots in the auditing system, Bump is transforming the auditor's office, moving it in a direction that should give taxpayers some optimism.

For examples:

Auditor Bump told The Standard-Times Editorial Board this week that a couple reports had come across her desk indicating some of the state's district courts weren't properly assessing probation fees. The Legislature doubled the fees in 2009 and authorized the courts to retain them to offset funding shortfalls.

The offending courts — Fall River and New Bedford top the list, by the way — were concerned that those who had prepaid their fees would be unfairly burdened, but the result was that probationers in neighboring towns, such as Lakeville and Freetown, or Fairhaven and Mattapoisett, would be assessed different fees, an unequal dispensation of justice. The audit showed that $1.2 million that could have gone toward the operation of these courts had not been collected.

Thanks to the weight of the peer review, which showed deficiencies in the office's planning, documentation, reporting and staff competence, legislation has now been included in both the House and Senate budgets that would allow the auditor's office to audit not just the contractors hired by the state, but the subcontractors as well. In one case, she noted that an audit of a contract for $11 million had resulted in the recovery of $7 million because of what were effectively no-bid contracts. Bump is turning the office's attention now to the myriad tax breaks offered to Massachusetts businesses. Between credits, incentives and exemptions, she wants to know if the taxpayers are getting what was promised. Out of 91 different cases examined, she says only a handful have appropriate accountability.

Of course, just because the accountability isn't all it could be doesn't mean that fraud or waste are running rampant. Just as the work of her predecessor, Joe DeNucci, wasn't without merit. He stated in the Boston Herald recently, reacting to the job cuts made by Bump, that he performed more than "5,000 audits and disclosed hundreds of millions of dollars in savings" during his tenure.

But the peer review Bump ordered is intended to take place every three years, and there hadn't been one for 15. The situation was ripe for complacency.

One of Bump's priorities during her campaign was to tackle the state's health care management system, but that battle remains in the future. We hope and expect that the detailed, professional approach evidenced so far by the new auditor will be applied to that task, which can offer so much to the residents of Massachusetts.